[WikiEN-l] Conventions and movie vs. film

[Stan Shebs]

james duffy wrote:

>
>>
>> On Thu, 2003-05-01 at 09:35, The Cunctator wrote:
>> > We actually did have a big discussion about this and film ended up 
>> being
>> > nixed because of the problem of digital videa replacing actual film 
>> as the
>> > medium for "films". Thus, "movie".
>
> If that is the case, then surely 'movie', a word linked with the 
> silent world of moving pictures, should be replaced on wiki by 'talkie'.
>
> And if the Cunctator's assertion is correct, then we need to change 
> it. Non-Americans do not generally use the word 'movie'. It is a word 
> only occasionally used outside the US and usually applied to heavily 
> Americanised Hollywood-ised blockbusters; Bruce Willis saves the 
> world, gets the girl and wisecracks his way to the conclusion, with 
> the promise of 5 sequels and billions of dollars of merchandising to 
> come. In fact 'movie' is used internationally in relation to 'film' 
> the way 'fast food' is used in relation to 'cuisine'. Stuff by Quentin 
> Tarantino is often described as 'film' whereas something with Arnie, 
> Sly or that genre is invariably a 'movie'. And anyone ever heard of a 
> 'movie noir'?

In which case a disambiguator of '(movie)' is totally appropriate
for the works of which you're contemptuous, eh?  In fact, people
could tell from the use of '(film)' vs '(movie)' in the article
title whether it's one that you approve of, and thus know how
to evaluate the worthiness of the article before reading it.

But seriously, there are a hundred ways that I could look down
my nose at, say, Ireland and the Irish, yet you don't see me spewing
those out at every opportunity.  So cool it with the cultural
superiority guff - nobody is actually interested in your opinion
on what kind of material they should admire.

Of course, you're welcome to try to convince people to
disambiguate with '(film)', but let me give you a hint - they'll
be a lot easier to convince if you treat them with respect.

Stan